arXiv:hep-ph/9812285v1 8 Dec 1998
The Standard Model of Particle Physics
Mary K. Gaillard
1
, Paul D. Grannis
2
, and Frank J. Sciulli
3
1
University of California, Berkeley,
2
State University of New York, Stony Brook,
3
Columbia University
Particle physics has evolved a coherent model that characterizes forces and particles at the most
elementary level. This Standard Model, built from many theoretical and experimental studies, is
in excellent accord with almost all current data. However, there are many hints that it is but an
approximation to a yet more fundamental theory. We trace the development of the Standard Model
and indicate the reasons for believing that it is incomplete.
Nov. 20, 1998
(To be published in Reviews of Modern Physics)
I. INTRODUCTION: A BIRD’S EYE VIEW OF THE STANDARD MODEL
Over the past three decades a compelling case has emerged for the now widely accepted Standard
Model of elementary particles and forces. A ‘Standard Model’ is a theoretical framework built from
observation that predicts and correlates new data. The Mendeleev table of elements was an early
example in chemistry; from the periodic table one could predict the properties of many hitherto
unstudied elements and compounds. Nonrelativistic quantum theory is another Standard Model
that has correlated the results of countless experiments. Like its precursors in other fields, the
Standard Model (SM) of particle physics has been enormously successful in predicting a wide range
of phenomena. And, just as ordinary quantum mechanics fails in the relativistic limit, we do not
expect the SM to be valid at arbitrarily short distances. However its remarkable success strongly
suggests that the SM will remain an excellent approximation to nature at distance scales as small
as 10
−18
m.
In the early 1960’s particle physicists described nature in terms of four distinct forces, characterized
by widely different ranges and strengths as measured at a typical energy scale of 1 GeV. The strong
nuclear force has a range of about a fermi or 10
−15
m. The weak force responsible for radioactive
decay, with a range of 10
−17
m, is about 10
−5
times weaker at low energy. The electromagnetic force
that governs much of macroscopic physics has infinite range and strength determined by the fine
structure constant, α ≈ 10
−2
. The fourth force, gravity, also has infinite range and a low energy
coupling (about 10
−38
) too weak to be observable in laboratory experiments. The achievement
of the SM was the elaboration of a unified description of the strong, weak and electromagnetic
forces in the language of quantum gauge field theories. Moreover, the SM combines the weak and
electromagnetic forces in a single electroweak gauge theory, reminiscent of Maxwell’s unification of
the seemingly distinct forces of electricity and magnetism.
By mid-century, the electromagnetic force was well understood as a renormalizable quantum field
theory (QFT) known as quantum electrodynamics or QED, described in the preceeding article.
‘Renormalizable’ means that once a few parameters are determined by a limited set of measurements,
the quantitative features of interactions among charged particles and photons can be calculated to
arbitrary accuracy as a perturbative expansion in the fine structure constant. QED has been tested
over an energy range from 10
−16
eV to tens of GeV, i.e. distances ranging from 10
8
km to 10
−2
fm.
In contrast, the nuclear force was characterized by a coupling strength that precluded a perturbative
1
expansion. Moreover, couplings involving higher spin states (resonances), that appeared to be on
the same footing as nucleons and pions, could not be described by a renormalizable theory, nor could
the weak interactions that were attributed to the direct coupling of four fermions to one another.
In the ensuing years the search for renormalizable theories of strong and weak interactions, coupled
with experimental discoveries and attempts to interpret available data, led to the formulation of
the SM, which has been experimentally verified to a high degree of accuracy over a broad range of
energy and processes.
The SM is characterized in part by the spectrum of elementary fields shown in Table I. The matter
fields are fermions and their anti-particles, with half a unit of intrinsic angular momentum, or spin.
There are three families of fermion fields that are identical in every attribute except their masses.
The first family includes the up (u) and down (d) quarks that are the constituents of nucleons as
well as pions and other mesons responsible for nuclear binding. It also contains the electron and the
neutrino emitted with a positron in nuclear β-decay. The quarks of the other families are constituents
of heavier short-lived particles; they and their companion charged leptons rapidly decay via the weak
force to the quarks and leptons of the first family.
The spin-1 gauge bosons mediate interactions among fermions. In QED, interactions among elec-
trically charged particles are due to the exchange of quanta of the electromagnetic field called photons
(γ). The fact that the γ is massless accounts for the long range of the electromagnetic force. The
strong force, quantum chromodynamics or QCD, is mediated by the exchange of massless gluons (g)
between quarks that carry a quantum number called color. In contrast to the electrically neutral
photon, gluons (the quanta of the ‘chromo-magnetic’ field) possess color charge and hence couple to
one another. As a consequence, the color force between two colored particles increases in strength
with increasing distance. Thus quarks and gluons cannot appear as free particles, but exist only
inside composite particles, called hadrons, with no net color charge. Nucleons are composed of
three quarks of different colors, resulting in ‘white’ color-neutral states. Mesons contain quark and
anti-quark pairs whose color charges cancel. Since a gluon inside a nucleon cannot escape its bound-
aries, the nuclear force is mediated by color-neutral bound states, accounting for its short range,
characterized by the Compton wavelength of the lightest of these: the π-meson.
The even shorter range of the weak force is associated with the Compton wave-lengths of the
charged W and neutral Z bosons that mediate it. Their couplings to the ‘weak charges’ of quarks
and leptons are comparable in strength to the electromagnetic coupling. When the weak interaction
is measured over distances much larger than its range, its effects are averaged over the measurement
area and hence suppressed in amplitude by a factor (E/M
W,Z
)
2
≈ (E/100 GeV)
2
, where E is the
characteristic energy transfer in the measurement. Because the W particles carry electric charge they
must couple to the γ, implying a gauge theory that unites the weak and electromagnetic interactions,
similar to QCD in that the gauge particles are self-coupled. In distinction to γ’s and gluons, W ’s
couple only to left-handed fermions (with spin oriented opposite to the direction of motion).
The SM is further characterized by a high degree of symmetry. For example, one cannot perform
an experiment that would distinguish the color of the quarks involved. If the symmetries of the
SM couplings were fully respected in nature, we would not distinguish an electron from a neutrino
or a proton from a neutron; their detectable differences are attributed to ‘spontaneous’ breaking
2
of the symmetry. Just as the spherical symmetry of the earth is broken to a cylindrical symmetry
by the earth’s magnetic field, a field permeating all space, called the Higgs field, is invoked to
explain the observation that the symmetries of the electroweak theory are broken to the residual
gauge symmetry of QED. Particles that interact with the Higgs field cannot propagate at the speed
of light, and acquire masses, in analogy to the index of refraction that slows a photon traversing
matter. Particles that do not interact with the Higgs field — the photon, gluons and possibly
neutrinos – remain massless. Fermion couplings to the Higgs field not only determine their masses;
they induce a misalignment of quark mass eigenstates with respect to the eigenstates of the weak
charges, thereby allowing all fermions of heavy families to decay to lighter ones. These couplings
provide the only mechanism within the SM that can account for the observed violation of CP, that
is, invariance of the laws of nature under mirror reflection (parity P) and the interchange of particles
with their anti-particles (charge conjugation C).
The origin of the Higgs field has not yet been determined. However our very understanding of
the SM implies that physics associated with electroweak symmetry breaking (ESB) must become
manifest at energies of present colliders or at the LHC under construction. There is strong reason,
stemming from the quantum instability of scalar masses, to believe that this physics will point to
modifications of the theory. One shortcoming of the SM is its failure to accommodate gravity, for
which there is no renormalizable QFT because the quantum of the gravitational field has two units of
spin. Recent theoretical progress suggests that quantum gravity can be formulated only in terms of
extended objects like strings and membranes, with dimensions of order of the Planck length 10
−35
m.
Experiments probing higher energies and shorter distances may reveal clues connecting SM physics
to gravity, and may shed light on other questions that it leaves unanswered. In the following we
trace the steps that led to the formulation of the SM, describe the experiments that have confirmed
it, and discuss some outstanding unresolved issues that suggest a more fundamental theory underlies
the SM.
II. THE PATH TO QCD
The invention of the bubble chamber permitted the observation of a rich spectroscopy of hadron
states. Attempts at their classification using group theory, analogous to the introduction of isotopic
spin as a classification scheme for nuclear states, culminated in the ‘Eightfold Way’ based on the
group SU(3), in which particles are ordered by their ‘flavor’ quantum numbers: isotopic spin and
strangeness. This scheme was spectacularly confirmed by the discovery at Brookhaven Laboratory
(BNL) of the Ω
−
particle, with three units of strangeness, at the predicted mass. It was subsequently
realized that the spectrum of the Eightfold Way could be understood if hadrons were composed of
three types of quarks: u, d, and the strange quark s. However the quark model presented a dilemma:
each quark was attributed one half unit of spin, but Fermi statistics precluded the existence of a state
like the Ω
−
composed of three strange quarks with total spin
3
2
. Three identical fermions with their
spins aligned cannot exist in an an s-wave ground state. This paradox led to the hypothesis that
quarks possess an additional quantum number called color, a conjecture supported by the observed
rates for π
0
decay into γγ and e
+
e
−
annihilation into hadrons, both of which require three different
quark types for each quark flavor.
3
A combination of experimental observations and theoretical analyses in the 1960’s led to another
important conclusion: pions behave like the Goldstone bosons of a spontaneously broken symmetry,
called chiral symmetry. Massless fermions have a conserved quantum number called chirality, equal
to their helicity: +1(−1) for right(left)-handed fermions. The analysis of pion scattering lengths and
weak decays into pions strongly suggested that chiral symmetry is explicitly broken only by quark
masses, which in turn implied that the underlying theory describing strong interactions among quarks
must conserve quark helicity – just as QED conserves electron helicity. This further implied that
interactions among quarks must be mediated by the exchange of spin-1 particles.
In the early 1970’s, experimenters at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) analyzed the
distributions in energy and angle of electrons scattered from nuclear targets in inelastic collisions
with momentum transfer Q
2
≈ 1 GeV/c from the electron to the struck nucleon. The distributions
they observed suggested that electrons interact via photon exchange with point-like objects called
partons – electrically charged particles much smaller than nucleons. If the electrons were scattered
by an extended object, e.g. a strongly interacting nucleon with its electric charge spread out by a
cloud of pions, the cross section would drop rapidly for values of momentum transfer greater than the
inverse radius of the charge distribution. Instead, the data showed a ‘scale invariant’ distribution: a
cross section equal to the QED cross section up to a dimensionless function of kinematic variables,
independent of the energy of the incident electron. Neutrino scattering experiments at CERN and
Fermilab (FNAL) yielded similar results. Comparison of electron and neutrino data allowed a
determination of the average squared electric charge of the partons in the nucleon, and the result was
consistent with the interpretation that they are fractionally charged quarks. Subsequent experiments
at SLAC showed that, at center-of-mass energies above about two GeV, the final states in e
+
e
−
annihilation into hadrons have a two-jet configuration. The angular distribution of the jets with
respect to the beam, which depends on the spin of the final state particles, is similar to that of the
muons in an µ
+
µ
−
final state, providing direct evidence for spin-
1
2
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |